(SOLVED) Image vs Clone vs Backup vs Snapshot: Terminology and Application

[JohnJ]

Greetings all,

I have some terminology and application questions that I have always been too embarrassed to ask in the past because they are so basic. Looking through the forums people and software/App descriptors either assume readers just know precisely what they mean using these terms or they use such terms interchangeably.

My situation (whew): I have a laptop using the mighty Linux Mint 21.3 Virginia. I also have a desktop computer that runs Linux Mint 21.3 Virginia and Windows 10 on two separate SSDs that I swap when I need to change between Linux and Windoze. I use Timeshift and Foxclone to ‘backup’ (I’ll use this general term for now) my laptop Linux Mint and also Foxclone to backup my desktop computer Linux Mint SSD. To backup my desktop Windows 10, I use an ancient Acronis True Image and the Windows Restore Point function. I place backups in separate HDD partitions so my Linux and Windoze C drives only contain operating systems. My data resides in separate HDD partitions away from any backups. My elderly neighbour has a desktop computer operating Windows 10 and I have been backing up his Windoze system using Acronis True Image and the Windows Restore Point function.

Here are my no doubt confusing questions and use/application of terminology.

1. Partition Image vs partition clone. What’s the diff? Is there a diff? It seems to me that people usually use the term cloning when discussing full disk cloning rather than disk imaging. But why? Hence my question.

2. I understand that I can use Foxclone to backup and restore Windoze operating systems but can this be done parking the backup on an external SSD or HDD? If so what format should the SSD or HDD be?

3. I understand that Timeshift Snapshots my Linux operating system partition. Is this the same as cloning or imaging my Linux partition?

Thank you all. Cheers

 

[bob466]

The difference between an Image and a Clone is this...

An Image...this creates a file of the whole system and is put and stored on an External HDD or SSD. The image created by Foxclone can be put back on the same HDD or SSD of the same size or on another computer.

Foxclone compresses the image and has a Verify tool..so you can check if the created image is good. It doesn't matter what the format is on the storage Drive and you can use either an SSD or HDD.

A Clone...this is when you Clone one HDD or SSD to another HDD or SSD of the same size...so you have two identicle Drives...Foxclone does this too and can be done inside or outside the computer.

It's said Foxclone will work on windoze but as I don't use windoze I don't know. you could try doing the same as you do in Linux.

Timeshift creates a snapshot of your system...the snapshot is stored on the same Drive or you can store it on an External HDD or SSD but the storage Drive must be formatted to EXT4...Timeshift isn't the same because it doesn't compress the snapshot or has a Verify tool...I don't use Timeshift now.

At the end of the day...you can't go wrong using Foxclone or Redorescue to create an image of your system...both are easy to use. I've been using Foxclone since it started and it's never let me down...hope this helps.

 

[JohnJ]

The difference between an Image and a Clone is this...

An Image...this creates a file of the whole system and is put and stored on an External HDD or SSD. The image created by Foxclone can be put back on the same HDD or SSD of the same size or on another computer.

Foxclone compresses the image and has a Verify tool..so you can check if the created image is good. It doesn't matter what the format is on the storage Drive and you can use either an SSD or HDD.

A Clone...this is when you Clone one HDD or SSD to another HDD or SSD of the same size...so you have two identicle Drives...Foxclone does this too and can be done inside or outside the computer.

It's said Foxclone will work on windoze but as I don't use windoze I don't know. you could try doing the same as you do in Linux.

Timeshift creates a snapshot of your system...the snapshot is stored on the same Drive or you can store it on an External HDD or SSD but the storage Drive must be formatted to EXT4...Timeshift isn't the same because it doesn't compress the snapshot or has a Verify tool...I don't use Timeshift now.

At the end of the day...you can't go wrong using Foxclone or Redorescue to create an image of your system...both are easy to use. I've been using Foxclone since it started and it's never let me down...hope this helps. View attachment 27190

Thank you. Yes, it helps and I am beginning to see the light. Sorry, some Qs.

• When you say, ‘An Image...this creates a file of the whole system…’. I am assuming that you mean the operating system AND the partition that it operates from. In my case I have the operating system sitting in a partition I created on my base SSD. If, for example I replace or resize my base SSD with a different sized partition for some reason will Foxclone faithfully restore my saved image onto the different sized partition.
• Back to the Cloning terminology. If I am correctly following you, Foxclone can, ‘…Clone one HDD or SSD to another HDD or SSD of the same size…’ Therefore technically the term cloning is not the same as an ‘Image’ because cloning must be done between same sized partitions. Correct or no?
• Regarding Timeshift. You mention, ‘Timeshift creates a snapshot of your system…’ Again, does this mean the operating system AND the partition that it operates from. So if I change the size of the partition will Timeshift restore to the new size partition? Correct or no? If correct then I too don’t see much point in Timeshift, except maybe as a second image backup, if Foxclone can restore either to the same size partition or to different sized partitions. Also as Timeshift doesn’t compress or verify then, as you say Redorescue would be a better second image backup system for us paranoid types. cheers

 

[Mike-BTU]

... At the end of the day...you can't go wrong using Foxclone or Redorescue to create an image of your system...both are easy to use. I've been using Foxclone since it started and it's never let me down...hope this helps. View attachment 27190

Bingo! Foxclone is all that I have used for many years.

Let me add that more than once, I have successfully restored the Foxclone backup files to the main drive. And I am about to to do the same tomorrow.

 

[bob466]

When you create an image with Foxclone...you must select all Partitions...this is what the image is.

The arrows show my two Partitions...Boot and Root. Foxclone takes an image of this used space...the circled area is unused space which is not included.

Foxclone stores the image in Folders you create and name...

Inside the Folder looks like this...

My SSD is 500GB but the Folder is after compression is about 128GB...this depends on used space at time of creating an image.

Foxclone will Clone one SSD to another...

You can see Cloning is very different..you can Clone inside the computer or outside but to Clone outside you need this...

Cloning creates two identicle Drives...I used to do this years ago..long before Foxclone and imaging software but the problem with Cloning is...you have two Drives the same...what's the point of that...whereas an image is small and you can have several on the same External Drive.

Foxclone user guide is here...https://foxclone.org/uguide.html

 

[MikeWalsh]

@JohnJ :-

In the case of "Puppy" Linux, only one of the above terms applies. Backups.

Understand this; Puppy is NOT installed in the usual way.....as a 'full' install, where the entire filesystem is written out in full to an entire partition. Puppy installs - and this is the recommended way - as a 'frugal' install.

This doesn't mean, as some people think, that it's a stripped-back, 'poor man's' version of the OS. Oh, no. The majority of Puppy's file-system exists as highly-compressed, 'read-only' files - think "immutable" - meaning that they never change from one boot to the next. It's like booting a squeaky-clean, brand-new install every time.

What DOES change is the 'save'.....a directory where all of a user's personalizations, customization and installed items are written to at session's end.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~​

Puppy employs the aufs style of 'layering' file-system, or on newer Puppies, this is being replaced by the overlayfs variant. Overlayfs is supported OOTB by the kernel. Aufs is maintained by a single Japanese contributor, who supplies patches to keep it functional with successive newer kernels.......and in recent years, due to bouts of ill-health, he's not been as regular with those contributions as he used to be. Hence, the gradual transition.

'Layering' file-systems take a bit of explaining to the uninitiated:-

aufs - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Barry Kauler's explanation of "How Puppy works" is probably the definitive tome on the subject, although it's rather technical:-

howpuppyworks.html

It explains how the various 'layers' can let a file from a lower level 'show through' in a 'window' of a higher level. Suffice it to say, a layering file-system is like a stack of thin sheets of tissue paper, where you can 'see' stuff at a lower level through the upper levels.

I don't pretend to fully understand it, or why Barry chose this particular way of doing things. Suffice to say, it's extremely effective, and is pretty much unchanged from early Puppies of 20 years ago. It just 'works'.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~​

Puppy was always intended to be run from a flash-drive; the 'frugal' terminology merely refers to the fact that Puppy is composed of just a few compressed files, which occupy little space by themselves. AND, you can run multiple Puppies alongside each other from a single partition, by enclosing each Puppy within its own uniquely-named directory. Puppy's boot-loader is designed to search TWO layers deep to find a bootable kernel.

Top & bottom of it, the only component of Puppy that needs 'preserving' is the 'save', where all your personal changes are written to. At boot, all the various components are decompressed and merged together within a 'virtual' RAM-disk, presenting the user with a complete Linux distro with all the usual stuff you would expect to find.....courtesy of Another Union File System.

(It DOES mean that by the simple expedient of NOT combining the 'save' with everything else, it's possible to run a completely vanilla version of your Puppy, as it came OOTB. This aids enormously when trouble-shooting for any reason.)

So in our case, "images", "clones" and "snapshots" don't really have any relevance, since Puppy's file-system only exists in RAM after you've booted her.....

I doubt the above has clarified anything.....and has probably left you more confused than ever! For that, I can only apologize.....but it does go to show that the Linux world is perhaps a lot more varied in terms of techniques employed that you might have thought from your experience thus far.


Mike.

 

[Condobloke]

What can I add to all of the above ?.....My experiences, that's what

1. Timeshift. The greatest lifesaver ever invented. Simple and straightforward.

Its snapshots should be saved to an EXTERNAL drive...formatted as ext4 (same as Linux)
Saving to the same drive as your OS can bite you on the bum if the drive fails..The number of snapshots kept is up for debate....my answer?...whatever suits YOU....based on experience. If you are a new user you may keep quite a few...8 or more. As a long term user, I keep 3. .... Sometimes as many as 5, if I have installed something I am unsure of.

2. Rescuezilla: I used this once per month. It takes an Image. I have used it a few times to Restore, and it works seamlessly.

 

[JohnJ]

When you create an image with Foxclone...you must select all Partitions...this is what the image is.
View attachment 27191
The arrows show my two Partitions...Boot and Root. Foxclone takes an image of this used space...the circled area is unused space which is not included.

Foxclone stores the image in Folders you create and name...
View attachment 27192
Inside the Folder looks like this...
View attachment 27193
My SSD is 500GB but the Folder is after compression is about 128GB...this depends on used space at time of creating an image.

Foxclone will Clone one SSD to another...
View attachment 27194
You can see Cloning is very different..you can Clone inside the computer or outside but to Clone outside you need this...
View attachment 27195
Cloning creates two identicle Drives...I used to do this years ago..long before Foxclone and imaging software but the problem with Cloning is...you have two Drives the same...what's the point of that...whereas an image is small and you can have several on the same External Drive.

Foxclone user guide is here...https://foxclone.org/uguide.html

View attachment 27196

Thanks Bob. I have seen the light. cheers

 

[JohnJ]

@JohnJ :-

In the case of "Puppy" Linux, only one of the above terms applies. Backups.

Understand this; Puppy is NOT installed in the usual way.....as a 'full' install, where the entire filesystem is written out in full to an entire partition. Puppy installs - and this is the recommended way - as a 'frugal' install.

This doesn't mean, as some people think, that it's a stripped-back, 'poor man's' version of the OS. Oh, no. The majority of Puppy's file-system exists as highly-compressed, 'read-only' files - think "immutable" - meaning that they never change from one boot to the next. It's like booting a squeaky-clean, brand-new install every time.

What DOES change is the 'save'.....a directory where all of a user's personalizations, customization and installed items are written to at session's end.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~​

Puppy employs the aufs style of 'layering' file-system, or on newer Puppies, this is being replaced by the overlayfs variant. Overlayfs is supported OOTB by the kernel. Aufs is maintained by a single Japanese contributor, who supplies patches to keep it functional with successive newer kernels.......and in recent years, due to bouts of ill-health, he's not been as regular with those contributions as he used to be. Hence, the gradual transition.

'Layering' file-systems take a bit of explaining to the uninitiated:-

aufs - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Barry Kauler's explanation of "How Puppy works" is probably the definitive tome on the subject, although it's rather technical:-

howpuppyworks.html

It explains how the various 'layers' can let a file from a lower level 'show through' in a 'window' of a higher level. Suffice it to say, a layering file-system is like a stack of thin sheets of tissue paper, where you can 'see' stuff at a lower level through the upper levels.

I don't pretend to fully understand it, or why Barry chose this particular way of doing things. Suffice to say, it's extremely effective, and is pretty much unchanged from early Puppies of 20 years ago. It just 'works'.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~​

Puppy was always intended to be run from a flash-drive; the 'frugal' terminology merely refers to the fact that Puppy is composed of just a few compressed files, which occupy little space by themselves. AND, you can run multiple Puppies alongside each other from a single partition, by enclosing each Puppy within its own uniquely-named directory. Puppy's boot-loader is designed to search TWO layers deep to find a bootable kernel.

Top & bottom of it, the only component of Puppy that needs 'preserving' is the 'save', where all your personal changes are written to. At boot, all the various components are decompressed and merged together within a 'virtual' RAM-disk, presenting the user with a complete Linux distro with all the usual stuff you would expect to find.....courtesy of Another Union File System.

(It DOES mean that by the simple expedient of NOT combining the 'save' with everything else, it's possible to run a completely vanilla version of your Puppy, as it came OOTB. This aids enormously when trouble-shooting for any reason.)

So in our case, "images", "clones" and "snapshots" don't really have any relevance, since Puppy's file-system only exists in RAM after you've booted her.....

I doubt the above has clarified anything.....and has probably left you more confused than ever! For that, I can only apologize.....but it does go to show that the Linux world is perhaps a lot more varied in terms of techniques employed that you might have thought from your experience thus far.


Mike.

Actually. That's very interesting. It means looking at things from a different angle. Good one. Thanks

 

[wizardfromoz]

@JohnJ when you are sure this is solved, you can mark it as such by going to your first post, and do as follows

Near bottom left of the post click Edit - (No Prefix) - Solved

Cheers

Wizard